Constant flux DC motor/generator.

[broli]

I'm glad to present the latest design being a result of all my homopolar research thus far. This design uses some very basic concepts and principle to make a motor or generator. The crucial part is the understanding of a homopolar motors/generators.

A lot of people have tried numerous methods trying to either have a motor without back emf or a generator without back torque but most attempts have been in vain. My research has lead me to believe that this is possible if the flux is contained rather than radiating freely. Thus far I have seen only one design where this concept is exploited with success. Here I present my own design, first as a proof of concept for table top experimentation and second as a complete unit for continuous power generation.

The motor part generates no back emf when operating since the magnetic part is rotating instead of the conductor part, this is because of newtons third law (the conductor torques the magnetic part and the magnetic part counter torques the conductor). The speed limit thus depends on the components and friction. The generator part on the other hand produces no back torque since both conductor and magnetic part are attached to each other. Since the conductor part that is farther from the axle is moving with a higher linear speed (because v= angular speed * radius), this will overpower the emf caused by the inner part exposed to the field and create a net emf.

In the first attached image the proof of concept of the motor is explained. This needs two C-cores and either a magnet or electromagnet (EM's are more preffered since you don't need to cut the core) to produce the field.  Then a conductor passes this field twice, twice generating what is mostly known as the lorentz force. On both pieces the force is equal but in opposite direction. Using simple leverage law you see that this creates a net torque on the system. and the conductor rotates. The conductor will be drawn into the field and pushed out every turn. Since the field is only present at the air gap the rest of the conductor is not affected.

In the other 3d renditions a possible complete motor design is shown. For the sake of clarity half of the ferromaterial has been cut away. Both rotor and stator are indicated. As you see the rotor is the magnetic part while the conductor is stationary, hence no back emf. This is just one design out of many possible others. There is no limit here, a different design can for instance use a ring magnet. The main principle would remain the same that is....

Flux cutting small radius produces small torque, flux cutting at bigger radius produces bigger torque.

Flux has to be cut two time in order for you to return to the same point. This is like drawing a circle and putting your pen in the middle of it, If you leave it you cross the circle, if you want to go back you need to cross it once more. Our key here is that we can cross it at two different points so a torque can be developed.

I hope people will at least try the proof of concept out to confirm the principle.

[lumen]

In the proof of concept example, the outer field would have leverage, but for a shorter rotational distance. After the wire is out of the outer field, it is still in the inner field and would want to rotate back.

The second motor design is much better. However, now things have changed! The same magnetic field is traveling through both gaps. The outer field gap's surface area is much larger than the inner gap's area. This means the inner field will be much stronger than the outer field and will be possibly exactly the potential to rotate either way or not at all!

Maybe you see it differently?

[broli]

Let's say the material can be saturated and remains saturated even without a EM or PM. Wouldn't it now be reversed. Since you have more magnetic domains at the bigger radius and thus a bigger net field. The ferromaterial is the crucial part not the magnet.

Only experimentation can reveal the truth. It takes a 5$ circuit to measure accurate field proportionalities.

[jadaro2600]

Animate?

I'm not sure what's attached to what given the cross sections.

I have a constant flux where magnetic field stays attached to the rotor, and the magnet spins, unfortunately, the design relies on gravity and it's 'wounded' axis to throw it over the tendency for it to want to align with the outside wire ( yes, the 'reference' frame ).

[broli]

Animate?

I'm not sure what's attached to what given the cross sections.

Did you not see the labels? They make clear which parts rotate and which parts stay stationary. An animation is overkill just to show the rotor part spinning.